Some months ago, Benazir Bhutto seriously toyed with the idea of introducing a new law to root out libel and defamation in the press. Far from demonstrating any sense of fair play and responsibility, she argued, the press was abusing its privileges and distorting the notion of freedom.
The response of the press was, as expected, quite self-righteous. We will not allow ourselves to be muzzled, we roared, the government is becoming fascistic, we shrieked. How can we print our papers if we have to constantly run for cover from the new laws, we argued.
In the end, a compromise was cobbled. The leaders of the press agreed to formulate and abide by a voluntary code of ethics. In exchange, the government promised to re-enact the press and publications ordinance of 1988 as demanded by the press.
It has now been three months since the agreement was cemented to establish a press body with a code of ethics. But there is still no such thing on the ground. The government, however, has kept its word: the relevant ordinance was promulgated last month.
Mr N D Khan, the new law minister, is now threatening to take action against the press. It seems the government is at its wits end about the continuing excesses of some newspapers and magazines. Before we jump up and start screaming against Mr Khan, we should pause and consider the complaints.
Ms Bhutto says that when terrorists gun down people in Karachi, the press simply reports that “so many people” were killed. The headlines do not mention the fact that they were victims of terrorism. By so doing, she argues, the press is indirectly indicting the government instead of the killers. All over the world, it is the other way round. Can anyone disagree with this charge?
Ms Bhutto also says that the press lacks credibility. No two newspapers, for example, are able to come up with the same figures for casualties in Karachi on any particular day. In fact, some papers seem to take perverse pleasure in distorting the facts, sometimes including in the “law and order death toll” people who may have died through accidents or natural causes. Can anyone dispute this observation?
Ms Bhutto is particularly irked by the continuous press attacks on Mr Asif Zardari. He is the press’ favourite whipping boy. Right or wrong, every conceivable charge has been laid at his door. Anywhere else, Mr Zardari could have taken the press to the cleaners. But not here. Here he is guilty unless proven innocent. But that slight inversion of the law doesn’t bother the press too much. After all, commentators argue, no one, least of all a hot-potato like Mr Zardari, can ever be proven guilty of corruption under our flawed and compliant legal system. This means, in other words, that journalists have the right to be judge, jury and prosecution all at the same time. Is this fair?
Journalists are also adept at insisting that existing press laws are sufficient to establish good working practices, therefore there is no need for any new laws. If that is the case, why is the press outraged at President Farooq Leghari for including them in a libel case provoked by the utterances of Nawaz Sharif? The accuser as well the purveyor of the accusation — printers, publishers, editors and reporters — all attract the provisions of existing libel laws. How can the press eat its cake and have it too?
There are other problems as well. Certain owner-editors make no bones about their political convictions. They love to rail against the government from every public platform under the sun and are totally blind to the excesses of the opposition. In theory, of course, they have a right to their views, however jaundiced these might seem to the government. But by claiming such exemptions, they have no business to demand, as a matter of intrinsic right, various concessions and favours (like advertisements, newsprint quotas, etc) from the government. Those whose political beliefs compel them to oppose the government should have the self-respect and conviction not to go begging for favours from Islamabad.
By and large, we are sad to say, the Pakistani press has forgotten all notions of neutrality, impartiality and objectivity. Fiction sells better than fact. Freedom has become a licence for anarchy.
If journalists are only human and can be as corrupt, egotistical and prejudiced as anyone else, why should they claim special privileges denied to other professions? If the fourth estate is determined to eschew responsibility, why should it be treated with kid gloves? These are valid questions and the press must be prepared to answer them satisfactorily.
A voluntary code of ethics needs to be devised immediately. A mechanism for its implementation should be hammered out. Errant newspapers have to be rapped on the knuckles. We cannot allow some rotten eggs to give our profession a bad name. The government is itching to have a go at us. Let us put our house in order before the indefatigable N D Khan whips out his pen and scribbles two irrevocable words on our petition for leniency: “Nothing Doing”!